I've created a special feature for the print media and broadcasters ("Page Nine" regardless of where or when it runs), that covers stories afresh, not the way news rooms typically flavor things. It would help reduce the distrust so many news consumers feel and could be the most avidly followed item you carry -- if you carry it. It certainly is well received by my audience.

Here's a casual sample. It might make you say, "We'll NEVER run that!" but Page Nine is being built around ad revenues from clear-thinking mainstream businesses.

I have found and posted 35 brand new books and DVDs
for gun owners -- self defense, non-lethal force, gun rights; and The Founders Package -- books the Founding Fathers read and wrote!http://www.gunlaws.com/books8newbies.htm

----------

CORRECTIONS

As expected, a number of Page Nine readers wrote to argue about the definition of "small arms" and the meaning of "arms" in the Second Amendment, from the prior P9 report, a point that remains unresolved. There was agreement however that "arms" was not then and is not now limited to guns. This means we still have a good shot at getting ray guns when they become available after Army testing (stun guns are already available along with all sorts of hand implements "the people" might need).

The often rebuked "powerful gun lobby," frequently criticized in lamestream reports as the most powerful lobby on Earth, is ranked 32 on one list of lobbyists, and 22 on another, according to writer Howard Nemerov. Page Nine had referred to a list that had NRA ranked at #78, after the forest industry, Walt Disney, and the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

The double-helix structure of DNA was found in 1953, not 1962, as reported in the last P9. I used the Associated Press date without checking myself. Sorry.

Advanced Notice:
The 2008 Gun Rights Policy Conference dates will be September 26, 27 and 28, right here in my hometown Phoenix, at the Sheridan Crescent Hotel.

----------

1- Gun Saves Lives

The lamestream media told you:
"Gunman thrown out of school, police say," and "Megachurches expand use of security forces," according to Associated Press headlines on Dec. 11, reporting on a murderer who died while shooting up a church in Colorado.

The murderer's age, background, writings, photographs, history and other personal details have been featured in "news" casts nationwide for days. News reports highlighting heinous criminal activity by misfits seeking notoriety have never been proven to inspire copycat behavior, according to news-media experts.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
"CCW-Permit Holder Shoots Murderer, Saves Lives," is a Page Nine corrected headline, changing the earlier phrase "Kills Murderer," now that news reports suggest the perpetrator may have killed himself after being repeatedly shot by a civilian.

Terrified of suggesting that a private citizen volunteer may have stopped a murderer, which could encourage similar copycat behavior amongst the public, national media outlets universally reported that a security guard defended a megachurch in Colorado this week.

CNN in particular bent over backwards to imply that only "authorities" or "officials" acted, could act, should act or would act and to downplay that a private civilian CCW-permit holder was once again a deterrent against an armed sociopath. News professionals refer to this as balanced, unbiased reporting. No ethics violations have been filed.

Late breaking reports, which kept changing, now say the murderer killed himself, after being shot "multiple times" by Jeanne Assam, 42, the attractive blonde female volunteer with the CCW permit. Images of the murderer seemed to outnumber images of Assam by at least 10 to 1, for unknown reasons.

The media has a stunning blonde hero with a gun yet decides to use scanned, panned, cropped, grainy black-and-white images of a dead murderer instead. How does that decision get made -- the same way -- by every news outlet in the country?

Experts note it is impossible for an autopsy to discover a self-inflicted suicide without at least identifying how many times and where the perp had been shot, facts which have not been reported yet. Reports indicated the perp was carrying anywhere from 40 to 1,000 rounds of ammunition, an indication of how hard it is to count ammo.

Rumors from cynics who claim mainstream reports will soon be changed to "Murderer kills self after being threatened by female," could not be confirmed at press time.

----------

2- Deer Kill People

The lamestream media told you:
Deer hunting, a barbaric blood sport enjoyed by a decreasing number of fringe elements in society, is being opposed by PETA and other wildlife rights groups fighting for humane treatment of the adorable little Bambi-eyed harmless critters.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Frank Miniter, author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Hunting," points out an overlooked benefit of hunting -- the number of human lives saved by decreasing deer-herd sizes. Two hundred people die and 25,000 are hurt in deer-car smashups every year, a fact generally omitted from lamestream news. Miniter notes you are five times as likely to hit deer within city limits, because you cannot hunt deer populations in such areas.

Rarely mentioned in "news" reports, it is illegal to let any edible portion of harvested game go to waste. Much harvested game is used in poverty programs to feed the hungry.

----------

3- Hate Crimes Blossom

The lamestream media told you:
Hate crimes are increasing at an alarming rate nationwide, according to the Associated Press in a report carried by most major lamestream news outlets.

Basically, hate crime is a type of "thought crime," where a defendant's attitudes are somehow determined by authorities, to either charge that a crime has been committed, or to increase the penalty for an otherwise plain crime like armed robbery, aggravated assault, rape or murder.

Proposed in George Orwell's novel "1984," thought crime was believed to be the scary but impossible creation of a novelist. The increasing number of hate crimes being charged challenges that assumption and has alarmed right-wing alarmists.

Wikipedia says hate crime is "relatively new." It then attempts to trace it back to treatment of Indians in America in the 16th Century, in what appears to be an effort to clothe the newish concept in legitimacy, and downplay its nature as a new tool of "thought police," also predicted in Orwell's novel.

The term may have been first introduced by the Justice Dept. in 1985, when it announced it was compiling "hate-crime statistics." According to the infoplease website, "The media picked up on the term and quickly began to write about an epidemic before these statistics had even been gathered."

The media reported this week that hate crimes are increasing at an alarming rate, without question. The idea that a serious crime is less of a crime because you were thinking the approved way disturbs many observers.

----------

4- Police Late Again

The lamestream media told you:
A 19-year old Nebraska man who wanted to, "go out in style," killed eight people and wounded five in an Omaha, Neb., shopping mall. He, "sprayed fire," on shoppers, according to reports, and shot up a teddy bear from his third floor perch. Details of his job at McDonalds, breakup with his girlfriend, family life and his lost puppy dog were featured by the Associated Press. No information about his gun appeared in initial reports, but will undoubtedly get coverage soon.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Police in full battle gear paraded around on camera for days after arriving too late to stop a madman who shot eight people to death in a shopping mall. None of the victims or witnesses returned fire from the mall which has "no guns allowed signs" to keep CCW permit-holders out.

After the murders, which experts note are strictly banned by law, the man killed himself, sparing the public an orgy of fawning news reports and a lengthy show trial.

Fulfilling the maniac's wishes, media outlets glorified the gunman with page-one coverage, macho phrases, direct quotes, images of helpless victims exiting under police watch with their hands raised once the incident ended, and intimate details about the shooter's family and background.

Although the event took place in Omaha, it ran in every major city in America, preempting news of other more likely, local and tragic deadly events that occur everywhere constantly. The media denies that this helps vilify guns, or that they would ever want to do such a thing. Mortality figures however do show that 300 people die daily from accidents, most of which could be prevented, a life-and-death fact rarely reported.

Though not specifically mentioned against the incessant footage of black-clad, riot-geared police, heavy with bullet-resistant armor, officers arrived at the scene when it was too late, which is routine. All of the victims were unarmed "for safety." It is not known how long it takes officers to don the heavy battle gear.

Paraphrasing a line from The Cartridge Family band, "Police don't draw their guns, they draw chalk lines when you're gone."

The recent Supreme Court case, Castle Rock v Gonzalez, unequivocally established that police have "no duty to protect" any given person or persons. The case is summarized here:http://www.gunlaws.com/SCGC-HellerCase.htm

Officers arrived just six minutes after the first 911 call, when the shooting was over. According to leading experts, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

----------

5- Heller Amicus Briefs

The lamestream media told you:
Washington D.C., in an effort to preserve its life-saving total gun ban from insidious legal attack by the powerful gun lobby, has hired the influential expensive law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, to assist its own army of staff lawyers on the case. U.S. v. Heller, the first gun case in 70 years, will go to the U.S. Supreme Court in March next year.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Academics for the Second Amendment (A2A) will be filing an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting Mr. Heller and urging the Supreme Court to affirm the Court of Appeals decision that the D.C. gun laws are unconstitutional. This is the High Court's 64th gun case since the Miller decision in 1939. Case summaries here --http://www.gunlaws.com/Supreme%20Court%20Summaries.htm

"Our brief will be written by attorneys David Hardy and Joseph Olson with historical assistance from Clayton Cramer. We'll be focusing on the ratification process in 1791 and the meaning and usage of terms found in the Second Amendment." Coordinated teams of experts are working on other elements nationwide.

A2A expects to show that no one in America at that time could have understood the amendment to preserve a state or government organization's "right" and that everyone who did speak out did so in the context of a meaningful individual right to keep and bear arms.

Preparing and filing the amicus brief will cost thousands -- attorney fees, printing expenses, filing fees, travel and lodging expenses, etc. They have some money but not enough. A2A, formed in 1992, is a tax-exempt educational organization, making your contributions tax-deductible. You can help the effort to protect the right to keep and bear arms with a donation.

A2A includes law-school teachers, historians, political scientists, and experts on government, who cannot be dismissed by the media as "gun nuts" nor can their statements be ignored as without foundation. Their academic records and reputations are too strong for that to occur. The message is simple -- the Second Amendment is there, it does preserve a meaningful individual right for responsible persons, and it cannot, without duplicity, be overlooked or interpreted into meaninglessness. They have filed winning amicus briefs in the past.

"Please don't ignore this request -- copy this post for a friend, forward it on, and send in your check or use our PayPal account."
--Joseph Olson, Professor of Law
A2A President
Academics for the Second Amendment
P.O. Box 131254
St. Paul, Minn. 55113http://AcademicsSecondAmendment.blogspot.com

----------

6- The Ramadan Diet

The lamestream media told you:
Muslims worldwide followed the phases of the moon closely to determine the start and finish of Ramadan last month, the holiest time in all of Islam. Followers fast from sun up to sun down in pious reflection of their religious beliefs.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Muslim observers wonder why, with all-day fasting for an entire month, many followers find they gain weight during the holy month. It's because, having fasted all day, they party and gorge themselves after sunset, sometimes until dawn, according to Homa Khaleeli, in the Johannesburg Mail & Guardian.

Khaleeli calls it, "a meal that would put a rugby-club curry night to shame," and "most of us learn how much food we can stuff into our mouths the second the sun goes down. Gorging on sweets, chocolate, and anything else you can find is hardly the most spiritual way to end a day."

The wild indulgences in food, smoking and revelry during the evening hours got little attention in the lamestream press, apparently distracted by the sanctity of the fasting half of the holiday. Attention to the debauched side of the holiday might also be offensive if it were put into print.

----------

7- Firefighters As Spies

The lamestream media told you:
The Patriot Act was a necessary compromise to protect the American homeland. The small changes to civil rights, like monitoring overseas phone calls, library records or emails to detect terrorist activity, is a small concession designed to keep us safe, and nothing to worry about. Fringe groups like the ACLU have objected to the common-sense plans.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The government effort to monitor potentially dangerous activity may be a juggernaut with inadequate controls, plunging headlong into territory as dangerous as the threats it seeks to prevent. Islamic jihadis, without knowing it, may have unleashed a federalized terror force that could be worse than Islamists are.

Firefighters and ambulance personnel have constant daily access to people's homes without a search warrant. Now, according to a report in Newsday, "When going to private residences, for example, they are told to be alert for -- a person who is hostile, uncooperative or expressing hate or discontent with the United States; unusual chemicals or other materials that seem out of place; ammunition, firearms or weapons boxes; surveillance equipment; still and video cameras; night-vision goggles; maps, photos, blueprints; police manuals, training manuals, flight manuals; and little or no furniture other than a bed or mattress."

The Dept. of Homeland Security has opened intelligence channels in major cities to pursue this terror-watch tool.

"We're there to help people, and by discovering these type of events, we're helping people," said New York City Fire Chief Salvatore Cassano.

Programs are apparently underway in 13 states so far, with Atlanta, Phoenix and Wash., D.C., specifically named in the Nov. 23, 2007 report. According to open-minded apologists following the developments, "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about."

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes that, under the leaked guidelines, he might be subject to an awfully long time in the slammer, without having actually done anything wrong. He does, however, have a significant amount of furniture, which might be a mitigating factor and decrease the sentence.

The lamestream media told you:
Iran wants this, Jordan wants that, the Palestinians are making demands, and Muslims are appealing to the U.N. to make the world a better place by catering to their demands.

The conventional wisdom says that liberals hate guns. Actually, the opposite is true. Hillary Clinton proves the point. She advocates nationalized healthcare.
Huh? What does that have to do with guns?

Everything.

Nationalized healthcare would not be voluntary, which means that it would be required and depend on government force for compliance. This means it would be backed up by government agents with guns. For enforcement.

Under nationalized healthcare, if a physician were to refuse to participate in the system and set up his own practice, he'd be fined and receive cease and desist orders. Eventually, if he continued to treat patients outside of the socialized system, he'd be arrested by agents with guns. Liberals support this pro-gun approach.

The same with patients. They would be arrested by agents with guns if they were to have the audacity to act like free people and pay private physicians for medical treatment out of their own pockets.

If you think this is just hype, I respectfully suggest you read Medicare's regulations.

Every government program near and dear to liberals (and millions of ersatz conservatives) depends on putting guns to people's heads -- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, public education, minimum wages, and PBS, to name several out of hundreds.

The nation was founded on the libertarian (classical liberal) belief that the only legitimate use of government force is to protect life, liberty and property. By extension, that means government has legitimate authority to prosecute murderers, thieves and con artists.

But now, the government uses force to take property (money) from respectable citizens and then spends the loot on fraudulent Ponzi schemes such as Social Security and Medicare. (If you don't believe that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, then please show me the Social Security Trust Fund.) Ironically, the government that is supposed to prosecute con artists has become the biggest con artist of the land.

Without a gun pointed at my head, I would not let the government take 15 percent of my income for the schemes. I wouldn't pay protection money to a Mafioso unless a gun was pointed at my head either. Most intelligent, freedom-loving people wouldn't.

Unfortunately, most intelligent, freedom-loving people now engage in policy-wonk debates with the likes of Clinton about nationalized healthcare and other programs -- that depend on guns. They debate the efficiency of socialism versus free markets, putting people to sleep with statistics and economic theories. What they should do instead is say, "A healthcare system that depends on government coercion for its existence is by definition unconstitutional, un-American, and likely to make things worse."

If government-run health care will be so good, why is the Veteran's Administration health care system so bad?

The Founders wanted citizens to own guns to protect themselves against a government that used guns for other than protecting citizens. That's why liberals love government guns but hate the Second Amendment.

An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.

----------

If this report works for you --
tell your friends!
Sign up (or off) for email delivery:alan@gunlaws.com

----------

Do you know what to do if you're stopped by police, or do you have pipe dreams that can get you into hot water? Learn how to handle a stop, and rights you do and do not have. What do you say and do if a cop wants to search your car? Must you show ID if you're not under arrest? "You and the Police"http://www.gunlaws.com/persafe.htm

Do something good for yourself -- get a book or two your school teachers would NEVER recommend:http://www.gunlaws.com

Alan: THANK YOU for the global warming article. I've seen several treatments lately debunking algore's junque science, but for anybody with two ounces of gray matter to rub together (one each, intelligence and objectivity), this piece with its easily-grasped graphics SHOULD put a stake thru the ecofreaks' hearts. But of course will not. --Barrett

Great stuff. I read every issue top to bottom. Keep up the great work! --Bill N.

[Thanks for the kind words? I carefully scan the news, do some research, apply basic knowledge and logic, and then write as clearly as I can to illuminate some of the nonsense that passes as news, that many people simply swallow without thought. Can you be more specific? Is there something in particular that prompted your observation? --Alan.]

Absolutely perfect response, Alan ! Truly -- I'm going to save this email to show other people what they should do when they get this kind of email -- instead of what so many of them do (which is escalate the flame into a conflagration). --Richard S.

Some world. Yup. There used to be a day when a man who didn't posses skill at arms was looked down upon as something rather less. Today he's "sensitive" and "enlightened" and a host of other gooey, fuzzy feel words. The fact of the matter is that he is a parasite, relying on others for his every need and incapable, indeed unwilling, to take a physical stand to protect what little he does have. De-evolution in my book. --Jim B.

Even I, as a fairly science-savvy individual (certainly more so than most people) but -- and this is significant to my point -- not a practicing scientist, saw examples of bias and poor science, and omissions of important facts and trends, in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons article that you and your guest Greg Cantoni invited us to read... It is sad that the J Am Phys Surg article that Greg Cantoni mentioned will be used by people who cannot recognize its shortcomings as "proof" that human contribution to Global Climate Change is a hoax or a myth... the article was noticeably lacking in places in terms of science, balance, and logic... even if, let us hope, the prevailing wisdom turns out to be wrong, then the side benefits to the environment from our efforts to combat Global Climate Change would make this a better world for future generations, or at worst, would have little or no effect, it would be pretty much a win-win situation...

[Alan: I checked, AAPS stands behind the article, and has found no errors in the charts or info provided.]

Alan, I shared the Global Warming paper with a local scientist at the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum and got the following feedback.

"I just wanted to pass something along to you. The "research paper" you gave me (by Arthur Robinson et al.) is not a real, published paper at all. It is something cleverly designed to LOOK like a published paper (in fact, it almost perfectly imitates the format of the prestigious research magazine "Science.") It's simply something written and posted on the wacky website of what I regard as a bogus "scientific" organization called the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. I've run across this organization before. You can read about it at the non-profit watchdog site "SourceWatch" [Note: The writer provided a non-working link]. The OISM is a political, agenda-driven nonprofit, not a legitimate science organization."

Regards, Jim C.

[Alan: So, why not just refute any of the facts provided by AASP, instead of hurling insults? And tell me that "political, agenda-driven nonprofit, not a legitimate science organization" doesn't describe the U.N., and (excluding the non-profit part) Al Gore.]

Keep them com'n Alan. Your words of wisdom are great food for thought. Also, let's hope the Supreme Court gives us something we can live with in the Heller case. --Joe. G.

Guess it is time for me to buy all the weapons I have dreamed about owning. --David B.